On 08/27/2013 10:39, Ken Moore wrote:
> On 08/27/2013 07:32, Claudio L. wrote:
>> One correction:
>> On 08/25/2013 12:46, Claudio L. wrote:
>>>>>>>> da1 is listed as a "USB Device", and then it fails to mount (tries
>>>> to mount with mount_msdosfs). This is particularly weird, since da0
>>>> is not shown, only its slices, but da1 shows as a separate disk.
>>>> da1s1 is also listed as "USB Device" (even though it's my root ZFS
>>>> disk already mounted).
>>>>>>>> da2 is correctly listed under its Windows label
>>>>>>>> I recently swapped the cables and got confused when writing the post,
>> so my root ZFS drive is actually da2, not da1 (sorry, my mistake),
>> and da2 is not shown, so the paragraph above should've said:
>>>> da1 is listed as USB Device (even though it shouldn't be listed).
>> da1s1 is correctly listed under its Windows label.
>>>> da2 is not shown at all (which is correct).
>>>>>> Claudio
>> That is good to hear, at least the current OS pruning is working
> properly.. :-)
>> If I recall correctly, if a parent device (da1) has children (da1s1)
> the algorithm will only list the parent of it satisfies a stricter set
> of criteria (seeing if it has additional available space/
> filesystems). I will check on that though and make sure. I will
> probably just need to tighten up the restrictions on parent devices
> even further.
>I just fixed the issue with parent/child devices, it looks like there
was a typo (or a later change to one of the subfunctions) that was only
looking for 2+ children to ignore the parent instead of any children.
--
~~ Ken Moore ~~
PC-BSD/iXsystems